DCRepublican.com

Eerie video of a giant panda showing up at Senator Chris Dodd’s house in DC. Looks like he had an agenda: exposing Dodd’s Countrywide Financial scandal. Watch the video!

read more | digg story

Despite the research from the Congressional Budget Office that shows that some 35% of those bailed out are more than likely to default anyway, some members of the Senate seem ready to charge on with this waste of taxpayers money at full speed.

It makes you wonder, who is this bailout really helping? Is it Chris Dodd who doing a favor for his friends at Countrywide? We’ll know soon enough.

read more | digg story

Some good weekend viewing, from the folks at BarelyPolitical.com:

Obama ‘08 - taste the rainbow

lol.

Had enough with high gas prices? Join the protest!

In related news and links, surging energy prices help drive annual cost-of-living rate rise to 4.2%.

Calculator: How long do you have to work to fill your tank?

Map: Think your gas prices are expensive? You might be surprised.

Another great BarelyPolitical production:

And of course anyone who has ever worked on a campaign can probably understand this video. There is a reason one of my favorite songs is”Gone Til’ November” by Wylcef.

I’m not sure if the only one who found this interesting, but check out the email below that the McCain campaign sent out to their supporters today:

We recently launched a brand-new JohnMcCain.com and want to invite you to visit our new website today. But first, we want to take a minute to say thank you for being a part of our online community. You are the engine that drives our online efforts, which have so far raised millions of dollars online, organized thousands of volunteers and spread John McCain’s message to your friends and family.

There is more work to be done and we’re excited to unveil a new website that will be the cornerstone of our online efforts. More importantly, we want to hear from you. After you’ve visited the new JohnMcCain.com please take a minute to complete a brief online survey to tell us what you think.

Working together, we’re confident the web will be an important tool to involve you in this campaign, to communicate our message, organize supporters and win in November. But we need your help - please visit the new JohnMcCain.com today, surf around and give us your feedback. Tell us what you like, what you don’t like and send us your ideas. More importantly, take a moment to forward this email to your friends and family with a personal invitation to visit our new website.

Thank you, as always, for your strong support for John McCain online. We look forward to hearing from you!

Sincerely,
The McCain 2008

Did anyone notice that nowhere in the email, or on the survey did they ask you for money? I can honestly say that of the hundreds of emails that I have received from various campaigns, this is one of the few that doesn’t have a fundraising ask in it.

Normally I would analyze this is being a wasted opportunity to raise some much needed money. However, this email does something that the McCain campaign hasn’t really been doing before, inviting people to be engaged with the campaigns website.

Now instead of asking for a cover charge to become involved with the campaign, all they are asking now is that you simply “join the conversation,” as David All would say.

I can honestly say that in terms of using email to engage supporters, this is probably the ‘best of McCain’ thus far.

If people open the email and take the survey, I’m certain that a vast majority of them will reach a new height in terms of their dedication to getting John McCain elected.

Furthermore, if this successful, this could be a good starting point for the McCain campaign to build an online model similar to Barack Obama, where you don’t ask for their money right away, but instead simply ask that they get involved. Once they’re in, asking them to invest $10, $20 or even $50 at a time becomes much easier, simply because they have already put so much time into the campaign.

Insert creative line here: ____________________________

(Image courtesy of: Wired.com)

It’s going to be hard as hell for Barack Obama to paint himself as the “change” candidate presenting a “new kind of politics” when he’s continually surrounded by nut-jobs like Congressman Robert Wexler (from ABC News/Political Punch):

Congressman Robert Wexler, D-Fla. — the Florida co-chair for the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. — today announced that he has signed on to support the Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush, introduced this week by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

I guess there were no serious issues for the Congressman to be focusing his time and energy on. Gas prices, housing woes, etc, nah… let’s just have some fun and try and impeach the President.

Even before gas prices started to inch near the $4.00 mark, one of the hot items in Washington has been a Democrat-pushed effort to try and pass a “windfall profit tax” on big oil companies.

If you work on the Hill or read the news regularly, odds are you’ve heard the concept of this tax tossed around dozens of times. However, one thing that you never hear when this is discussed is what does “windfall profits” actually mean?

Yes, I know that this effort has been blocked by Republicans in the Senate (thanks, guys), however I’m quite confident that this isn’t the last you’re going to see of this, or something similar. Take note that Harry Reid voted against this bill, just so they would have the issue back on the floor.

So the question what are “windfall profits?”

Instead of me trying to explain it, I think the Economist does it best:

A controversial concept, often used by politicians to justify imposing a tax on profit that in theory is earned unexpectedly, through circumstances beyond the control of the company concerned, and is thus deemed undeserved and ripe for the taking by the tax authorities. As the profits were neither expected nor a result of the efforts of the firm, taxing them should not harm the firm’s incentives to maximize future profits.

The problem comes when greedy politicians start claiming that profits are windfalls when in fact they are deserved and expected. Then taxing them sends a signal to firms that they should not try too hard to make profits, as if they do too well they will not get to keep the profits anyway. If this became widely believed, effort would probably decline and economic growth would be slower.

Why on earth would the government ever want to present a proposal that would suggest that if something happens beyond your control and you make money on it, you should be taxed more excessively than if they were planned occurrences? Since when was America about the government telling you what profit is reasonable?

To make this issue resonate and make it more comfortable amongst constituents, Democrats paint a nice picture of these tax dollars going towards advancements in energy independence. They make it sound like taxing evil big oil is going to save the world and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

If it wasn’t so ridiculous, their logic would be funny to me. From what I gather, the Democrats model to energy independence runs something like this:

1. Excessively tax oil companies who happen to make a profit off of selling a product to American consumers.
2. Prevent any attempts to tap into American oil reserves
3. Propose some ridiculous new government program
4. Blame the Republicans for our current energy and economic problems
5. Take a long recess

Both House and Senate Democrats (and even a few Republicans) need to get together and take a crash course in basic economic concepts. The principles of supply and demand are very powerful, and it should be no surprise to anyone that they play more of a factor in the price of oil than any executive.

Instead of listening to what the pundits are saying about the price of oil, I recommend that anyone who is interested in this issue start following what the business news channels are saying. For example, here is what you won’t hear the pundits talk about:

Citigroup raised its 2008 oil price forecast to $117 from $95 a barrel, and boosted its estimate for 2009 to $122 from $88 a barrel, citing fundamental reasons for the upward trend, driven by continued erosion of non-OPEC supply estimates, and the fact that demand, while softening, is by no means falling low enough to materially offset tightening supply. (Source: BusinessWeek.com)

When you follow the business side of the news, you often see things from a different perspective than what is being presented to you by the network news. Furthermore, if you follow international headlines, like this one from two weeks ago:

Nigerian militants warn of attacks on oil facilities

You’ll start to get a better glimpse into why we’re in the position we’re in today, as well as a better argument for why we should start tapping into some of the oil that we have here as a means to offset these unpredictable situations that are increasing the price we pay at the pump.

I know that there is a lot more to this issue; however, I’ve noticed that there are a lot of people, including many Hill staffers and Members of Congress who have resorted to simply using the talking points that the majority leadership has put together, without addressing the real issues we’re facing.

Sadly, the only reason that their talking points are able to work is because the American public is so uninformed, and reliant on news outlets to digest complex stories for them.

Maybe $5.00 per gallon gasoline will lead people to start doing their homework?

—

Of course, I can’t write about oil and gas prices without providing a shameless plug to a great petition that I urge you all to sign: GasPriceProtest.com

Below is an email I received this evening from the DNC. While it’s obvious that I wont be making a contribution, this is definitely an approach that I’m curious to see the results for. What if you’re a lobbyist who just happens to like Barack Obama?

Is the ‘party of inclusion’ now becoming the party that has a theme of telling people that they cant play a role in this election? But I guess it’s their party, they’ll do what they want to.

Dear DC Republican,

I wanted to drop you a quick note about a major policy change here at the Democratic Party.

As we move toward the general election, the Democratic Party has to be the Party of ordinary Americans, not Washington lobbyists and special interests. So, as of this morning, if you’re a federal lobbyist, or if you control political action committee donations, we won’t be accepting your contribution.

This is an unprecedented move for a political party to make — one that has sent shockwaves through Washington and has turned the debate on clean campaigns upside down. We’ve unilaterally agreed to shut lobbyists out of the process, and are we’re relying on people just like you.

Just imagine what hundreds of thousands of Americans donating $20, $30, or $50 at a time can accomplish together. Imagine the signal that it sends to anyone who looks at John McCain’s political machine and the special interest money it needs to fuel every move it makes.

We have a chance to change the way business is done in this country, and we’re taking the lead. Will you join us and make a contribution right now to help us elect Barack Obama?

http://www.democrats.org/nonlobbyists

I’ve written before about guys like Charlie Black and Rick Davis, lobbyists who are at the highest levels of McCain’s campaign. But they’re just the start — John McCain and the RNC suck up lobbyist money millions of dollars at a time.

In May, McCain had his best fundraising month of the campaign, and it was directly because he refuses to shut special interests out.

But we did, and we need your help. This is an example of the kind of White House Barack Obama would run. Make a contribution to help elect him:

http://www.democrats.org/nonlobbyists

I’ll be in touch later about our plans for the general election, but I wanted to let you know about our policy change right away.

Thanks,

Howard Dean